Let's have a discussion on the virgin birth

Author: Tradesecret ,

Posts

Total: 114
Stephen
Stephen's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 6,167
3
2
2
Stephen's avatar
Stephen
3
2
2
--> @zedvictor4
Tiberius...

Well when all was said and done he was the top Bod.
I see.  Yes Tiberius is said to have been "top bod" / 2nd Emperor ( son of god) during the time of Jesus. 


Does he get a mention in the Bible?

He does. According to  Luke . But only as a mark in time and mentioned only once by name.


So what did Tiberius have to say?

 Nothing to my knowledge. We can only imagine that all local problems and decisions were left in the hands of his procurator Pilate to sort out. This would include  Zealots, rebel rousers, pretenders to the throne and pretenders the title  Son of God.  

How's Mrs Vic by the way?
rosends
rosends's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 581
3
2
6
rosends's avatar
rosends
3
2
6
--> @zedvictor4
Understood. I could try and defend or contextualize but that would not be fruitful. 
GnosticChristianBishop
GnosticChristianBishop's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 216
1
2
3
GnosticChristianBishop's avatar
GnosticChristianBishop
1
2
3
What I find funny about the virgin birth, is that it was ever accepted by people.

People have to see Joseph as being cuckolded by Yahweh, who was practicing bestiality to reproduce a chimera half bred son.

People would also have to see Yahweh as a deadbeat dad, given that he screwed off after impregnating Joseph's wife.

Reproduction wise, man is greater than God, because we can reproduce true and not just a chimera from an inferior species.

We can also make many children while Yahweh can only make one.

Regards
DL


10 days later

Tradesecret
Tradesecret's avatar
Debates: 2
Posts: 2,620
3
2
6
Tradesecret's avatar
Tradesecret
3
2
6
--> @GnosticChristianBishop
What I find funny about the virgin birth, is that it was ever accepted by people.

People have to see Joseph as being cuckolded by Yahweh, who was practicing bestiality to reproduce a chimera half bred son.

People would also have to see Yahweh as a deadbeat dad, given that he screwed off after impregnating Joseph's wife.

Reproduction wise, man is greater than God, because we can reproduce true and not just a chimera from an inferior species.

We can also make many children while Yahweh can only make one.

Miracles have that affect on people.   I find it funny that people like you exist.  

Your second line makes no sense whatsoever.  As is your third line.  The conception of Jesus had nothing to do with sexual intimacy.  It was God breathing the breath of life into Mary - no different in kind to God breathing life into Adam in Genesis.  Mary was not raped. She was not violated in any manner. Indeed according to her words she is described as the most blessed amongst woman. 

Joseph, admittedly was not happy with the situation prior to an angel of God explaining the situation.  He was going to divorce her given how unbelievable her story sounded.   And until God spoke to him through the Angel, Joseph didn't believe her.  And this is the point - it is an unbelievable story. And no-one in the Christian world would have you think otherwise. This is what makes it so profound.  And so unique.  

Joseph was not a deadbeat.  He taught Jesus his trade. He was THE carpenter in town.  Not just a carpenter. 

Your next line also seems to have no real meaning. 

God had one son.  Are you really suggesting that the amount of children one has makes them superior?  That really is a bigoted thing to suggest.  Not at all very political correct in our day and age. 
Stephen
Stephen's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 6,167
3
2
2
Stephen's avatar
Stephen
3
2
2
--> @GnosticChristianBishop @Tradesecret
Tradesecret wrote: Joseph was not a deadbeat.  He taught Jesus his trade. He was THE carpenter in town.  Not just a carpenter. 

Why would Joseph need to teach  Jesus, a Royal in the line of David and Solomon, the craft of carpentry?



Tradesecret wrote: God had one son.

Not according to the bible. You are simple plain lying.

zedvictor4
zedvictor4's avatar
Debates: 19
Posts: 7,389
3
3
4
zedvictor4's avatar
zedvictor4
3
3
4
--> @Stephen
Mrs Zed is very well and is revelling in the wonders of cataract surgery.

She now eagerly awaits the the same for her left eye.


Thanks for asking.


I hope that you and yours are flourishing too.
GnosticChristianBishop
GnosticChristianBishop's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 216
1
2
3
GnosticChristianBishop's avatar
GnosticChristianBishop
1
2
3
--> @Tradesecret
Throwing more derogatory names at me makes this your second childish posts in a row.

Let me correct your thinking that I was calling Joseph a deadbeat dad.

I was calling the genocidal prick Yahweh that.

Now go away as I have no time for those like you.

I am trying to improve my style and you are not worth my time.

Regards
DL




Tradesecret
Tradesecret's avatar
Debates: 2
Posts: 2,620
3
2
6
Tradesecret's avatar
Tradesecret
3
2
6
--> @Stephen
Tradesecret wrote: Joseph was not a deadbeat.  He taught Jesus his trade. He was THE carpenter in town.  Not just a carpenter. 

Why would Joseph need to teach  Jesus, a Royal in the line of David and Solomon, the craft of carpentry?
Hello Stephen, long time no banter.  At least here you ask a genuine question.  And I am prepared to answer. 

Joseph was a carpenter, despite being of the royal line of David.  Yet there is no indication that this meant that their every need was supplied by the public purse.  Teaching Jesus the same craft was about many things. It is good to work and earn money.   Again there is no evidence that the line of David was receiving any funds from the public purse.   Working to earn money - however they might be - was necessary. Especially given that they did not have welfare like we do in many countries today. 


Tradesecret wrote: God had one son. 

Not according to the bible. You are simple plain lying.
Well I suppose I could have said only begotten son, but I was responding to GnosticBishop's comments "We can also make many children while Yahweh can only make one."https://www.debateart.com/forum/topics/7655/post-links/335142 - hence it is not a lie since - I was replying to a comment someone else made.  good try old chap - but really sad. 
Tradesecret
Tradesecret's avatar
Debates: 2
Posts: 2,620
3
2
6
Tradesecret's avatar
Tradesecret
3
2
6
--> @GnosticChristianBishop
Throwing more derogatory names at me makes this your second childish posts in a row.
What derogatory name did I call you?  I don't believe I called you any such terms. 

The closest thing to derogatory was in relation to a comment you made - which I said about the comment - was it was a bigoted comment to make. Yet it didn't infer or imply that you were bigoted. Although I suppose an overly sensitive person might see it that way.  


Let me correct your thinking that I was calling Joseph a deadbeat dad.

I was calling the genocidal prick Yahweh that.
Ah that is what you meant.  Ok.  I disagree but that is your opinion. Good for you. 

Now go away as I have no time for those like you.

I am trying to improve my style and you are not worth my time.
Given this is a topic I posted - I am not going away.  Please feel free to ignore me but that is a matter for you. 

I concur it would be good for you to improve your style.  As for me being worth your time, well, again that is a matter for you. You decide for you - what is valuable for you.  Yet if you post on this topic, I am and will respond if I think it is necessary to correct your errors. Have a pleasant afternoon. 

Stephen
Stephen's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 6,167
3
2
2
Stephen's avatar
Stephen
3
2
2
--> @Tradesecret
Joseph was a carpenter,

So you keep saying, but can you define what  'carpenter' means in the ancient biblical sense?


Tradesecret wrote: God had one son. 

Not according to the bible. You are simple plain lying.
Well I suppose I could have said only begotten son,

 Who was Adam's father?  And you need to define the word beget/begot before we can further this conversation. I wouldn't want you  moving the goalposts further down the line.

Tradesecret
Tradesecret's avatar
Debates: 2
Posts: 2,620
3
2
6
Tradesecret's avatar
Tradesecret
3
2
6
--> @Stephen


Adam did not have a biological father.  Yet Luke 3:38 records that Adam was the son of God.  

Begotten - I suppose means sired.   From the same substance. 

I don't recall anywhere in the Bible that says Adam was "begotten".  He was said to be made or created.  

Interestingly, reading the dialogues that occurred during the Council of Nicaea, the discussions in relation to how to describe the birth of Jesus, was around whether to say he was made or begotten.   Arius wanted the word made.  The Council ruled against him.  Eternally begotten was the wording determined for the creed. 

Arias had his reasons - and so did Athanasius, both were careful students of the Scriptures and came to different conclusions.  




Stephen
Stephen's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 6,167
3
2
2
Stephen's avatar
Stephen
3
2
2
--> @Tradesecret



Adam did not have a biological father.

 And neither did Jesus according to you and the bible. Go back and read what YOU wrote earlier in this thread.



 Yet Luke 3:38 records that Adam was the son of God.  


Yes it does, doesn't it. So your only son of god- begotten or otherwise doesn't really hold water does it.. 

Begotten - I suppose means sired.   From the same substance. 

Which indicates a male a reproductive male when speaking of birth.
It  simply means bring into being or existence, cause to bring about,including sired: cause a pregnancy resulting in the birth.


I don't recall anywhere in the Bible that says Adam was "begotten".

There are a lot of things that the bible falls short on (those half stories I often mention) and you often object that atheist plea to silence.. 




Interestingly,....the Council of Nicaea, the discussions in relation to how to describe the birth of Jesus, was around whether to say he was made or begotten.  

 Maybe the didn't understand synonyms? 




Arius wanted the word made.  The Council ruled against him.  Eternally begotten was the wording determined for the creed. 

Arias had his reasons - and so did Athanasius, both were careful students of the Scriptures and came to different conclusions.  

 So even they couldn't make their minds up and simply came to a compromise then?

And using your own guesses and pleas to silence, someone had to have biologically fathered the child even if we are are talking test-tube babies or artificial insemination.

 Point is your ONLY son of god is proven to be bullshite and you know it.







Tradesecret
Tradesecret's avatar
Debates: 2
Posts: 2,620
3
2
6
Tradesecret's avatar
Tradesecret
3
2
6
--> @Stephen
Adam did not have a biological father.

 And neither did Jesus according to you and the bible. Go back and read what YOU wrote earlier in this thread.
Wow! You are finally starting to get it. (Smile and a Gold Star for you) Jesus did not have a biological father.  He had a biological Mother. Not so a father.  His Father is spiritual.  No biology there. 

 Yet Luke 3:38 records that Adam was the son of God.  

Yes it does, doesn't it. So your only son of god- begotten or otherwise doesn't really hold water does it.. 
I guess you will need to explain why you come to that conclusion.  God the Holy Spirit breathed into Mary and she conceived.  Jesus was begotten. He certainly came from somewhere.  He was not a figment of anyone's imagination.   Mary carried him for 9 months.  Yet as you point out - there was no biological father. 

Begotten - I suppose means sired.   From the same substance. 

Which indicates a male a reproductive male when speaking of birth.
It  simply means bring into being or existence, cause to bring about,including sired: cause a pregnancy resulting in the birth.
I suppose it could mean a male reproductive person.  And if we were talking about a human father, everything you wrote makes sense. Except the bible doesn't say the father was human.  Jesus had no biological Father. From the same substance is important. I doubt that you have read any of the discussions at the Council of Nicaea - but the matter of whether Jesus' substance was of the same as God the Father was a focal point. 

I don't recall anywhere in the Bible that says Adam was "begotten".
There are a lot of things that the bible falls short on (those half stories I often mention) and you often object that atheist plea to silence.. 
It is true that an argument from silence is not compelling for or against.  You asked the question about Adam and put "begot" into the same sentence.  I don't think he was begotten biologically.  Adam was made by God but he was not begotten in that sense since he did not have a mother. He was formed from the earth and God breathed into him. Jesus had a biological Mother - but no biological Father. Adam had neither biological parent but he did have a creator. 

Interestingly,....the Council of Nicaea, the discussions in relation to how to describe the birth of Jesus, was around whether to say he was made or begotten.  

 Maybe the didn't understand synonyms? 
If you read the scripts - you will know that they very much did understand synonyms and very much it was a focal point of their discussions about whether to say Jesus was made or whether he was begotten.  



Arius wanted the word made.  The Council ruled against him.  Eternally begotten was the wording determined for the creed. 

Arias had his reasons - and so did Athanasius, both were careful students of the Scriptures and came to different conclusions.  
 So even they couldn't make their minds up and simply came to a compromise then?
I am sure you can read.  The Council did make up their minds and did not come to a compromise.  Arius was turfed out as a heretic and Athanasius won the day. The Church council concluded rightly in my view that Jesus was eternally begotten. Not made or created.  He was of one substance with the Father. And eternal. 

And using your own guesses and pleas to silence, someone had to have biologically fathered the child even if we are are talking test-tube babies or artificial insemination.
Wow - it appears you have now gone back on what the rational and reasonable conclusion. Jesus had no biological father. 

 Point is your ONLY son of god is proven to be bullshite and you know it.
Not at all. 
zedvictor4
zedvictor4's avatar
Debates: 19
Posts: 7,389
3
3
4
zedvictor4's avatar
zedvictor4
3
3
4
--> @GnosticChristianBishop
Nonetheless:

In the tale,  the Joe character doesn't come across as the alpha male.

Most real  blokes would have had the missus stoned to death.

Which would suggest, either that the sprog was actually Joe's, and he and Mary were spinning an elaborate yarn.

Or, that Joe was in fact intellectually deadbeat and hadn't got a clue, and would fall for any old nonsense.


I wonder what Jesus did on his fifth birthday.